to hear the status of this project. we will bring this back at a later date for requesting action for from the commission. -- action from the commission. i would like to talk about where we are in the process after selecting a developer in the rfp process, signing an exclusive agreement with them. we have been working with a developer on a proposal, financial proposal, used proposal, which would essentially be wrapped up into a term sheet. that would simply describe the basic elements of a project, economic parameters, fundamental terms, basis for negotiating, transaction documents for the company would follow, if the project moves forward as proposed. the project will continue to

change through the public review process. this is really just the basic outline. the project -- some of the other reviews that will occur may also change the project because in needs to be analyzed under the environmental review. any mitigation measures, alternatives proposed, will also be analyzed as to their environmental consequences. also, the project will undergo public review during other heightened bulk issues changing in this project. those considerations will come either before the planning commission or board of supervisors, after an environmental review. projects very often change as we go through these processes. that is number 1, what the term

sheet is. also, to talk about where we are in the process. if the project changes substantially, sfwp may need to examine the term sheet. the port commission would have every opportunity to consider the use now, or proposed in the future, have action in front of it to make decisions. for example, terms could change to propose different land mixes, perhaps the intensity of the land use is changing. right now, this term sheet is only for the uses highlighted by the developer. any changes would require a port commission decision in the future. çççpossibly, if after seqa rç

it mayççç require another. çççççççjustçççççç e will2come back to the port commission and ask for endorsement of the termççççn ç o ççç-;takeççç our termçd ofç supervisors forñrçç thei. ççççmçñrñyççççafter l iñrçu!ççççñrçñrççç. ççñrçççw3çñrçyççççça çççççperhaps asççç earl8 for approval of a termñrççç. lrçmççççççç>>ççç ans s?

lot[ççóçççñrçççççlrçk about where you are going to build aç garageç ççñrmççs recommendedñrççç thatçççe condominiums go up. vçççççmççñrççççççç

it happened as the opera her for the 4 colçthe contract stated specifically that certain

amenities be there for the use of the tenants. i have lived here for 40 years. i do not know what would happen if you put a high rise apartment building in the period that my left specifically for the tenants, so that we could have a place to be in the open. [unintelligible] the contract i was talking

about stated specifically that for 30 years, the gateway center would run the pools and tennis courts for recreation -- nonprofit. after that, and they could be leased out for profit, which they did for 30 years to the bay club. they run it now has a well operated city, at a profit. >> you are going to have to finish up your comment. >> ok. senator feinstein -- when this was being argued -- people never give up. this is some of the best property in town.

senator feinstein and the chief of redevelopment -- when we were arguing these points several years ago -- >> thank you. i'm going to have to ask you -- >> it cannot be built on. >> think you very much. -- thank you very much. any other public comment on this item? commissioners, questions? i wouldççç just like to clare commission'svç position. the commissionç acknowledges there will be changes to the project and revisions to a ççproject are typical inv:çe public review process. we reiterate this term sheet is intended onlyçç toç setççe projects in keeping with port commission standard practices çfj÷çççççç the developme.

we will revisit when the port commission considers the approvalç of the project following completion of the seqa review. ççççççç>> item 11, new b. çççñrç>> any new business? çç>>çvççzçç public commew business? çççñrçç>>çççñrçççça citizenç of san francisco. ççi am down here on the fourth prettyçñrç frequentlyç --ç pretty frequently. the number;hjtçççç bicycled people have increased, so itñrñç veryç dangerous to walkçç one promise not. bicycles go at all speeds.

-- walk on theçç kçñrççpro. çi hadç a seriousçñrç(="tvai çççwas shocked that these pee were running their bicycle so fast past me. i cannot remember to look over my shoulder everyç time i moved when i am on the promenade. i have even tried to stay on 1 side, but theyç still follow y. they come around, they follow you. ñrm[çyou walk in theçç middlo çaround you. çñrççiç amçç traumatized. somethingç has to be done. ççççeither youç have to put on how fast they can goçç.

ççyou also have people with çchildrenççç on bikes. they are not going to ride on the street. ççq( çpromenade? ñrçthat is why i am here. i spoke to the bicycle ççcoalition,çñr çpeople, theyççñr have this n mentality that they can do anything they want. çwhat we want. i said, that is why everyoneç s attackingç us in the world, weo what we want. you have to harmonize with everybody. if you live in 1 city, you have to have the attitude of survival for everybody.

even if you are a mountain man, you have to civilize. ççi do not want to go into th. all i am trying to say is some order has to be brought. the police have abandoned the promenade. you have security current that can only observe and report, but they do not see every incident. have bicycles on the sidewalk. >> thank you. any other public comment? çç>> ok, if we are ready to adjourn, i would like to adjourn this meeting in memory of billç coblin.

he will be missed in many, many ways. >> all those in favor? ççt(meeting adjourned. thank you.

>> i want to thank you all for being here today.

i'm the mayor of the city of long beach, california, and i'm also a trustee of the u.s. conference of mayors. mayors from all over this great state have assembled here today to talk about the energy efficiency conservation block grant program. this is a program that started in 2007, and it delivers funds directly to cities to be able to improve their energy efficiency, reduce their carbon footprint, and as important, create new jobs in our community. i will just give you a little background in this really quickly. program was originally thought of in 2005 when the u.s. conference of mayors launched its climate protection agreement. the agreement is a landmark measure across the country. the u.s. conference of mayors initiated it. it began with 141 mayors. it now has 1044 mayors that have

signed on to the climate protection agreement, committing to reduce our climate footprint in each one of our communities. the energy block grant program has been an integral part of that. it gives us the resources to reduce our energy consumption and reduce our carbon footprint, and as i said, it also creates jobs. it has been the result of a lot of people working together, but i do need to thank the speaker of the house, nancy pelosi, who worked hard to make this program a reality, and we would not be here today except for her efforts. on behalf of american cities, i want to thank the speaker for her commitment and diligence. without her help, as i said, this would not be here. i also want to thank president obama and his administration for his support of the program as well as the american recovery and reinvestment act, which is

also to fund a number of new initiative projects in a number of our cities. as i said, we are here to work for efficiency and reduce our carbon footprint. in my city, we are investing about $4 million to accelerate private city efforts to reduce energy efficiency in our city structures as well as some of our residential buildings, and we will hear in a moment from the mayors of other cities about what they're doing, but this program is exactly what we need to continue. it is really the only major funding source we have to be able to improve our efficiency and work on climate change issues, particularly by reducing our carbon footprint. we know that a successful plan for reducing u.s. energy consumption is grounded in local action, and all across this country, it has been demonstrated that local government can take action that is effective and not only reduces our impact on the environment but also puts people

back to work. we have been leading the nation in this effort, and i have to tell you, it has been an innovative program that provides the flexibility needed to local governments, and it is the kind of thing that must be carried on in the future. i now would like to introduce a friend of mine and no stranger to all of you, san francisco mayor gavin newsom, who is going to discuss what things have been going on right here in san francisco with this program. mayor newsom: thank you for your stewardship and leadership in bringing us all together. i thank all the mayors that are here and all of you for taking the time to be here. from our perspective, there are few things more important than this. at the end of the day, what we are really talking about, what we are organizing around is job creation and economic development, reducing the costs not only to government, but

reducing the cost to individual businesses, large and small, that want to reduce their energy bill at the same time we advance our environmental principles and advance our collective goals. as many of you know, san francisco has a low global climate action plan. basically all that is is the formal plan that 3043 other mayors -- at 1043 other mayors have signed to robot greenhouse gas unless it -- emissions to 1990 levels by 2012. we have done that through -- in small part in terms of that reduction. that is energy efficiency. that is the low hanging fruit. that is the easy part of this effort. we have some very ambitious goals nationwide. about half of that, most objective analysis has been done

that shows that half of that can be achieved through energy efficiency, so you do not need something in the order of magnitude. just common sense. swapping out that level, taking the old boiler and replacing it, taking that call don t --hat -- that caulk gun in different respects. the think about it is it is so obvious and so easy but we were not achieving our goals until the president and speaker got together and demanded we get some block grants. we needed some energy development block grants and we needed some autonomy. let me conclude by making a jobs case, and i was making this just a moment ago, on why this

matters. we get about $7.7 million through block grants, and we are using that jobs now program, the federal subsidy for direct jobs. 3600 jobs we have created. they are going out and doing energy audits, so we are doing free energy audits, and then we are using all these grants, and then we are providing free resources for folks to actually deal with their boilers and other issues, but here is the big idea, and this is something -- if we put $1 billion -- you do not need to take $1 billion credit. you can just leverage the percentage that is arguably of to what $1.8 trillion that is just sitting there on the sidelines. just to leverage that money is guaranteed, like we do small business association loans, and start getting people to work today on energy efficiency and create real jobs. here's how we do it -- you get

$1 billion just making this case, and you invest into coal, and generate about 870 jobs. sounds great, but you could generate 1000 or 1500 jobs in nuclear energy, but if you want to create more jobs and wealth and opportunity, 1900 jobs in wind or about 3300 jobs, but the big game changer is retrofitting and green building. 7000 jobs for that $1 billion investment. you can just use the money that is sitting in all these financial institutions and guarantee those loans and get people back to work, doing the energy efficiency work that all these mayors are doing quite successfully, and you do it in rural and suburban areas, not just these big metro areas. get people to work, particularly those in the building and construction trades, those that have the highest rate of

unemployment. that is the opportunity, and that is where we are trying to communicate, what we are trying to organize around. this is a win on all fronts, and this is being demonstrated in cities large and small across the country. one of the successes of the stimulus plan is the focus on jobs and this economy. i want to thank everybody who is here and think cathy and her team for their leadership, and think mayor foster for helping bring all of you here to our city and county of sentences go. thank you. >> thank you, mayor newsom. >> i would like to bring our partner to the podium, the efficiency secretary, cathy joey. >> thank you all for coming. three quick points. on behalf of the president and secretary chu, let me underscore

that energy efficiency is central to economic recovery from our perspective. we need to bleed into all the energy potential. americans spend $1.10 trillion on utility bills in their businesses and homes per year. we can become more efficient. that is $200 billion we can save, and we can create jobs while doing it. for every billion that gets invested, 7000 jobs. this program will go on to create more. we love our partnership with the mayors. the mayors are working directly in investing money in cities on the ground, in buildings, schools, and communities. this program has 2350 grantees from across america that have programs under way this summer, demonstrating that investments in clean energy, green energy,

helps economies. watch where the projects are. some of them are wildly innovative. some just make good sense. there are sensible, money saving light bulbs that should have gone in a long time ago. putting new elie de -- led technology into traffic lights, which create safer streets. there are literally thousands of projects under way. take note of what those are. share information. in washington, we are very excited about our partnership. we are very excited about the energy savings that will come from this program and in the future. thank you all. >> thank you, madam secretary. finally, we will have another major address you with what is going on in her city. she is from the city of santa barbara. >> thanks you. i appreciate the opportunity to speak here. i think mayor newsom for your

leadership from the beginning. hopefully, we can see some allocations after the first- round is moved around. that is important for congress to see the investment of this as not just an expenditure. the city of santa barbara has a little over 100,000 people. our funding was about $658,000. we did lighting efficiency projects in four parks as well as some heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning retrofits in eight city buildings. the park's alone are saving 140,000 kilowatt hours annually, a savings of $88,000. the eecbg grants, coupled with other funding we did with our municipal building energy audit, is sitting as $150,000 in our general fund. along with the jobs that are being created with this project,

when i came in and met with a number of mayors this morning, the first question has been how is your budget going. what is going on with your general fund and your public works? in our city, if we are able to save $150,000 a year that would have gone to paying for energy bills, which can put it into police officers, firefighters, parks and recreation -- the municipal services people have come to expect. that is helping us get over this recession on top of giving private-sector jobs. it is saving energy at the same time. it is a great program. we need to keep it coming to the cities. i appreciate the leadership of the u.s. conference of mayors for having this meeting today. >> thank you, mayor schneider. are there any questions from anyone? >> i was just wondering about --

speaking of leveraging grants, clean energy loans. can some of that money come to this program? >> can you repeat that? i did not get all of that. i am sorry. >> we just passed with a lot of fanfare and no follow-up, not because of good intentions but because of fannie and freddie. i was going to use the wrong adjective. [laughter] their unwillingness to be supportive of the program -- they are wrong. this is right. the president is right. congress, by and large, is right. all these mares are ready to go to do what -- all these mares are ready to go to do what the secretary started. the first